SUKHMANI SOCIETY FOR CITIZEN SERVICES,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD, AMRITSAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 486/ASR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar23 August 2023AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found it appropriate to remand the matter back to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is to examine the issue in light of a claimed decision by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in favor of the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee society appealed against the denial of deduction under Section 11 for AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15. The registration under Section 12AA was restored by the ITAT on 15.05.2018, but the CIT(A) had not given effect to this order.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 11 when its registration under Section 12AA was restored, and the CIT(A) had not given effect to the ITAT's order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Hearing: 08.08.2023Pronounced: 23.08.2023

Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM:

1.

Both the appeals have been filed by the by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Bathinda dated 27.01.2017 & 23.01.2018 in respect of Assessment Years: of the Act particularly when the registration was restored on 15.05.2018 by the Amritsar Bench of ITAT.

2.

There was a delay of 383 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal which is being explained on account of the delay in getting approvals from the competent authority in the ADC office and change of officer in-charge during that period. We consider the procedural delay is bonafide for the reason that the delay was caused by the office of ADC in granting the permission to file these appeals before the Tribunal.

Accordingly, the said delay of 383 days in filing appeals are hereby condoned and the appeals are admitted to adjudicated on merits of the case.

3.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted vide application dated 08.08.2023 that the assessee has been granted registration u/s 12AA of the Act as restored by the Tribunal vide its order dated 15.05.2018 by cancelling order passed by the CIT(E), Bathinda u/s 12AA(3) dated 06.01.2014. The ld. AR further submitted that the CIT(E), Chandigarh has not given the appeal effect to the aforesaid order dated The ld. AR has submitted that the delay of the department against the order of the Amritsar Bench of ITAT dated 15.05.2018 has been decided by the jurisdictional Punjab & Haryana High Court, however, he could not produce the copy of the said judgment. Therefore, he requested that both the appeals be remanded back to the ld. CIT(A) to pass the order afresh to examine the matter in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. The assessee undertakes to file the copy of the said judgment before CIT(A) with other documentary evidence to seek the relief in the matter.

4.

Per contra, ld. DR has no objection to the request of the counsel of the assessee.

5.

Having heard the rival contention, perusal of the record and the impugned order, we consider it deem fit to remand back the matter to the file of the CIT(A) to examine the issue in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court which is being claimed to be delivered in favor of the assessee. The CIT(A) shall grant an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the Assessing Officer (AO), back to the ld. CIT(A).

6.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23.08.2023

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →